[lit-ideas] Re: [lit-ideas] Le Pesanteur et la Grâce

  • From: Jlsperanza@xxxxxxx
  • To: lit-ideas@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
  • Date: Sat, 7 Aug 2004 00:58:18 EDT

We are considering S. Weil's posthumous* thought,
 
         "The demonstrable   correlation of opposites 
         is an image of the  transcendental correlation 
         of contradictories."
 
(* Geary corrects me (offlist): "The thought is not posthumous, unless  in a 
'figure of speech'. Weil was certainly alive when she thought  it").  R. Paul 
re-considers my 'colour' illustration as it may apply  to Weil's 
generalization, and writes:
 
>How many things are said to be red or not red here? If  we
>latch onto the lower left proposition 'Some...are...' then  we [might] have
>'Something ('at least one thing,' as logicians say)  is red. Where do we go 
from
>here and how are we helped to go there by the  square of opposition? Beats 
me.
>This is something the S of O can't handle  unless there is an offstage
>demonstration that for all x, if x is blue, x  is not red, and even then it's
>impossible to see where, on a diagram  which uses _as such a diagram must_ 
the
>same subject and predicate  throughout, a proposition with a different 
subject
>and predicate would  go. (The truth of 'All cats are mammals' doesn't bear 
on the
>truth of  'All whales are mammals' e.g.), so there is no place for  
propositions
>about red things and blue things in the same  illustratrtion.
 
Indeed. I stand corrected. Note, however, I was thinking  of the 
'trascendental' datum -- "Nothing can be red and blue all over  at the same 
time" -- 
which, incidentally, is listed as 'analytic a priori' in 
 
_http://faculty.washington.edu/wtalbott/phil450/trB&S.htm_ 
(http://faculty.washington.edu/wtalbott/phil450/trB&S.htm) 
 
Rather, R. Paul uses the 'animal' example:

>The truth of 'All cats are mammals' doesn't bear on the
>truth of  'All whales are mammals'.
 
I guess the parallel would be:
 
      x is a cat.
      x is a whale.
 
As R. Paul observes, indeed:
 
>The truth of 'All cats are mammals' doesn't 
>bear on the truth of 'All whales are mammals'.
 
But, a la "nothing can be red and blue all over at the same time" we could  
concoct a corresponding analytic truth of zoology:
 
   "Nothing can be a cat and a whale at the same  time."
 
(Conditional: [It is analytic that] if x is a cat, (then) x is not a  whale). 
(**)
 
(** Again, Geary corrects me offlist: "In a manner of speaking. Think  
"catfish".")
 
R. Paul concludes:
 
>'Opposite' is a word Weil might have thought about 
>for more than five minutes if she wanted to say 
>something intelligible about 'contradictories'.
 
But, again, remember this all posthumous, and thus  somewhat ironic to judge 
whether she might (or then, might have not)  thought about this "for more than 
five minutes". 
 
More charitably, J. Krueger writes:
 
>explore how saying against is  different from placing or  positioning 
>against?  I have some ideas of what  that looks  like to me...
 
        "The  demonstrable correlation of opposites is an image of  the
transcendental  correlation  of contradictories."
 
Mmm, not sure what Weil meant -- which is back to E. Holder's observation  -- 
worth repeating here:
 
      "I studied Simone Weil in an existentialism  class.  ... My 
      friend and I would sit there completely  baffled.  We had 
      absolutely no idea what anyone was talking  about. It 
      seemed like nonsensical conversation after  nonsensical 
     conversation.    I probably would  have [dropped the Existentialism
      class] if I hadn't needed it as a  prerequisite. Interestingly 
      enough, both of us  would up doing  extremely well in the
course."
 
which, if you think, goes on to illustrate rather well that 
 
        "The demonstrable   correlation of opposites  
is an image of the  transcendental correlation 
         of  contradictories."

 
 
(Or 'Whatever', as L. J. Kramer would put it -- :-)).
 
What we need is Geary's list of polar opposites, vs. contradictory  opposites 
and other types of 'contrary' terms. It's can't be as simple as red  and 
non-red (cf. war and peace). 
 
Cheers,
 
JL
 
 


------------------------------------------------------------------
To change your Lit-Ideas settings (subscribe/unsub, vacation on/off,
digest on/off), visit www.andreas.com/faq-lit-ideas.html

Other related posts: